What is wrong with inequality?

Authors Avatar

Question 3

Answer both parts:

  1. What’s wrong with inequality?
  2. If inequality is an appropriate subject of moral concern, what’s wrong with levelling down?

        Since the days of the French Revolution, the concept of equality has become a fundamental issue concerning political and legal philosophy. The idea that men are created equal, suggests that a level of equality should be reflected when making economic, social and political decisions involving society. Equality is not concerned in making everyone uniform, but more “about ‘levelling’ the conditions of social existence which are thought to be crucial to human well being”. The idea of being equal stems from the perception that everyone has equal intrinsic moral value. Consequently, to make good collective decisions, the interests of every single person should be given equal consideration. Parfit suggests that there are different types of equality, namely political equality, equality before the law, equal rights or equality of interest.

I will now proceed to explain the concept of equality and inequality. I will also put forth arguments on why inequality is seen wrong by some. However, I feel that in reality, inequality is not wrong and that levelling down principle is unnecessary.

The word ‘equality’ is not a linguistic concept, but rather, it requires the distinction between various concepts of inequality, in order to decide which of these conceptions (or which combination) states an attractive political ideal. The predominant political philosophers in the debate about equality; Rawls, Dworkin and Nozick primarily “seek for equality in some space in their theories – a space that is seen as having a central role in that theory”. For example, compare Rawls’ egalitarian theory of equality with Nozick’s. Rawls is interested in equal liberty and equality in the distribution of ‘primary goods’ where as Nozick demands equality of libertarian rights. Both are seeking different things, but stem centrally from the same idea. Right wing egalitarians cling to equality of opportunity whilst those one the left support equality of outcome. It is clear, and evidenced, that society as a whole believes in some kind of equality, but is this correct? What is wrong with inequality?

Inequality within a society is typically measured using the ‘Gini’ index. This calculates the degree of inequality in the distribution of family wealth. Using this measure, the United Kingdom is the least ‘equal’ society in the European Union. In the global arena, the United Kingdom has greater equality of income distribution than the United States of America but less than Switzerland. On the face of things, it is evident that inequality is “an appropriate subject of moral concern”. This is because; inequality raises many issues and creates a myriad problems. There is an intimate connection between people's views about equality and their views about justice and fairness.  Egalitarians believe that to be worse off than others – by no fault of your own, is unfair and unreasonable.

There are certain inequalities which are seen to be wrong. The prominent inequalities include primary goods, resources, economic benefits (wealth), power, prestige, class, welfare, satisfaction of desire, satisfaction of interest, need and opportunity, among others. For the point of this essay, I will concentrate on inequalities in the economic sense. So, what is wrong with economic inequality?

Unequal distribution of wealth gives rise to “all the disorders of which nine-tenths of the inhabitants of all civilised countries justly complain”. In certain countries, the amount of money you have (wealth you possess) makes a difference in whether or not you have a sufficient amount of food, or whether you are malnourished. It is the difference as to whether or not you have a roof over your head or are homeless. Wealth remains an important issue in determining a person’s quality of life, for example, wealth plays a role in determining whether or not a person receives any medical treatment or even the most basic form of education. It should be noted that although these problems don’t usually arise in developed countries such as the United Kingdom, it is still apparent in other third world countries such as Indonesia and Kenya.

Join now!

Secondly, economic inequalities would also lead to economic emergencies, for the reason that it would garner the existence of monopolies and oligopolies. These market states would lead to inefficiencies as well as exploitation of the consumer. This is due to the fact that the monopolies are no longer in competition with anyone, and therefore, have no incentive to spend money on research and development and create new ideas to benefit the consumer; or even consider the welfare of the consumer.

        Roy Jenkins in his well known paper called Equality regards the struggle for equality in society as a ...

This is a preview of the whole essay